What the Watson v. Republican National Committee Decision Means for the 2026 Midterm Elections
In a 5-4 decision issued in the final week of its 2026 term, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Mississippi law that permits the counting of mail ballots that arrive at election offices up to five days after Election Day. The decision in the case, Watson v Republican National Committee, means that Mississippi and 13 other states can maintain their current policies of counting late-arriving ballots this November and beyond.
While upholding the law avoids making disruptive changes to election policy shortly before an election, it also means that the risks of reporting delays that stem from late-arriving ballots remain front and center in the 2026 midterms. Even though the Court did not find that counting late-arriving ballots conflicts with federal law, state lawmakers should still act to mitigate the risk of reporting delays in future elections by enacting legislation that sets an Election Day deadline for mail ballots.
The origin of the Watson case was a 2024 challenge by the Republican and Libertarian parties to a Mississippi law that allows the counting of mail ballots that arrive up to 5 days after the election if the ballot envelope was postmarked on or before Election Day. Mississippi is one of 14 states that will count late-arriving ballots if mailed by Election Day, with the late arrival window ranging from 1 day late in Texas to 21 days in Washington. The challengers argued that counting late-arriving ballots conflicted with the definition of “Election Day” in federal law and should not be permitted in elections for federal office, but the Court’s majority disagreed.
From an administrative perspective, the decision maintains the status quo and does not require major changes to election procedures less than six months before a major election in the 14 impacted states. Had the court struck down the Mississippi law, states would have faced operational challenges related to voter education about the new deadlines and also policy choices around how broadly to apply the Election Day deadline. With enough notice, voters are certainly capable of adapting to whatever deadline the government establishes. However, government actions taken in order to maximize access to the ballot could have introduced a fresh set of administrative complications in response to a different outcome in Watson.
For example, federal election law only applies to federal offices which means the Watson case did not directly impact state or local elections. However, at least one state, Maryland, preemptively approved a policy ensuring that late-arriving votes in state and local contests would still be counted even if the court required an Election Day deadline for federal offices. While this scenario did not come to fruition, an alternative to this bifurcated system would be setting the same Election Day mail ballot deadline for all federal, state, and local races.
On the other hand, the decision also means that the longstanding problems associated with late-arriving mail ballots, such as delayed reporting in tight races, remain in place and could become an issue in elections that will determine the balance of power in Congress. For example, six of the 18 U.S. House races classified as “toss ups” by the Cook Political Report are located in states that count late-arriving mail ballots. This means that if these races prove to be competitive and it remains unclear which party will control the House of Representatives, Americans could find themselves waiting for mail ballots to be counted in California, New Jersey, New York, Texas, Virginia, or Washington before knowing the overall result of the 2026 midterms.
The problem with this scenario is that slow results lead to information vacuums that can allow distrust in the process to take root. Setting policies that help avoid this outcome should be a priority for lawmakers. There are certainly other factors besides the mail ballot deadline that contribute to slow reporting, such as lengthy ballot curing time periods and whether states permit election officials to pre-process early-arriving mail ballots. However, setting an Election Day mail ballot deadline remains a concrete step that lawmakers can take after the 2026 midterms to help minimize the risk of future reporting delays that could erode trust in American elections. Ultimately, the Supreme Court’s decision in Watson means that setting mail ballot deadlines is a decision for the states to make. While late-arriving ballots will certainly be a part of the elections in November, lawmakers in the 14 states that permit late arrivals should consider enacting an Election Day deadline by 2028 in order to minimize the risk of trust-eroding reporting delays in the next presidential election cycle and beyond.